Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Oral Health 1/2023

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Computed Tomography | Research

Trueness of cone-beam computed tomography-derived skull models fabricated by different technology-based three-dimensional printers

Authors: Xiaotong Wang, Sohaib Shujaat, Eman Shaheen, Eleonora Ferraris, Reinhilde Jacobs

Published in: BMC Oral Health | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Three-dimensional (3D) printing is a novel innovation in the field of craniomaxillofacial surgery, however, a lack of evidence exists related to the comparison of the trueness of skull models fabricated using different technology-based printers belonging to different cost segments.

Methods

A study was performed to investigate the trueness of cone-beam computed tomography-derived skull models fabricated using different technology based on low-, medium-, and high-cost 3D printers. Following the segmentation of a patient’s skull, the model was printed by: (i) a low-cost fused filament fabrication printer; (ii) a medium-cost stereolithography printer; and (iii) a high-cost material jetting printer. The fabricated models were later scanned by industrial computed tomography and superimposed onto the original reference virtual model by applying surface-based registration. A part comparison color-coded analysis was conducted for assessing the difference between the reference and scanned models. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Bonferroni correction was applied for statistical analysis.

Results

The model printed with the low-cost fused filament fabrication printer showed the highest mean absolute error (\(1.33\pm 0.24 \text{mm}\)), whereas both medium-cost stereolithography-based and the high-cost material jetting models had an overall similar dimensional error of \(0.07\pm 0.03 \text{mm}\) and \(0.07\pm 0.01 \text{mm}\), respectively. Overall, the models printed with medium- and high-cost printers showed a significantly (\(p<0.01\)) lower error compared to the low-cost printer.

Conclusions

Both stereolithography and material jetting based printers, belonging to the medium- and high-cost market segment, were able to replicate the skeletal anatomy with optimal trueness, which might be suitable for patient-specific treatment planning tasks in craniomaxillofacial surgery. In contrast, the low-cost fused filament fabrication printer could serve as a cost-effective alternative for anatomical education, and/or patient communication.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Chadha U, Abrol A, Vora NP, Tiwari A, Shanker SK, Selvaraj SK. Performance evaluation of 3D printing technologies: a review, recent advances, current challenges, and future directions. Progress in Additive Manufacturing. 2022;(2022):853–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40964-021-00257-4. Chadha U, Abrol A, Vora NP, Tiwari A, Shanker SK, Selvaraj SK. Performance evaluation of 3D printing technologies: a review, recent advances, current challenges, and future directions. Progress in Additive Manufacturing. 2022;(2022):853–86. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40964-021-00257-4.
2.
go back to reference Ostaș D, Almășan O, Ileșan RR, Andrei V, Thieringer FM, Hedeșiu M, et al. Point-of-care virtual surgical planning and 3D printing in oral and cranio-maxillofacial surgery: a narrative review. J Clin Med. 2022;11:22. CrossRef Ostaș D, Almășan O, Ileșan RR, Andrei V, Thieringer FM, Hedeșiu M, et al. Point-of-care virtual surgical planning and 3D printing in oral and cranio-maxillofacial surgery: a narrative review. J Clin Med. 2022;11:22. CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Pillai S, Upadhyay A, Khayambashi P, Farooq I, Sabri H, Tarar M, et al. Dental 3d-printing: transferring art from the laboratories to the clinics. Polym (Basel). 2021;13(1):1–25. Pillai S, Upadhyay A, Khayambashi P, Farooq I, Sabri H, Tarar M, et al. Dental 3d-printing: transferring art from the laboratories to the clinics. Polym (Basel). 2021;13(1):1–25.
4.
go back to reference Zoabi A, Redenski I, Oren D, Kasem A, Zigron A, Daoud S, et al. 3D Printing and virtual surgical planning in oral and maxillofacial surgery. J Clin Med. 2022;11(9):2385. Zoabi A, Redenski I, Oren D, Kasem A, Zigron A, Daoud S, et al. 3D Printing and virtual surgical planning in oral and maxillofacial surgery. J Clin Med. 2022;11(9):2385.
5.
go back to reference Meglioli M, Naveau A, Macaluso GM, Catros S. Correction to: 3D printed bone models in oral and craniomaxillofacial surgery: a systematic review. 3D Print Med. 2020;6(1):1–19. Meglioli M, Naveau A, Macaluso GM, Catros S. Correction to: 3D printed bone models in oral and craniomaxillofacial surgery: a systematic review. 3D Print Med. 2020;6(1):1–19.
6.
go back to reference Noureldin G, Dessoky MY. 3D Printing: towards future of oral and maxillofacial surgery. Acta Sci Dent Scienecs. 2020;4(7):107–12.CrossRef Noureldin G, Dessoky MY. 3D Printing: towards future of oral and maxillofacial surgery. Acta Sci Dent Scienecs. 2020;4(7):107–12.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Hatz CR, Msallem B, Aghlmandi S, Brantner P, Thieringer FM. Can an entry-level 3D printer create high-quality anatomical models? Accuracy assessment of mandibular models printed by a desktop 3D printer and a professional device. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;49(1):143–8.CrossRefPubMed Hatz CR, Msallem B, Aghlmandi S, Brantner P, Thieringer FM. Can an entry-level 3D printer create high-quality anatomical models? Accuracy assessment of mandibular models printed by a desktop 3D printer and a professional device. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;49(1):143–8.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Kamio T, Onda T. Fused deposition modeling 3D printing in oral and maxillofacial surgery: problems and solutions. Cureus. 2022;14(9):e28906. Kamio T, Onda T. Fused deposition modeling 3D printing in oral and maxillofacial surgery: problems and solutions. Cureus. 2022;14(9):e28906.
9.
go back to reference Melenka GW, Schofield JS, Dawson MR, Carey JP. Evaluation of dimensional accuracy and material properties of the MakerBot 3D desktop printer. Rapid Prototyp J. 2015;21(5):618–27.CrossRef Melenka GW, Schofield JS, Dawson MR, Carey JP. Evaluation of dimensional accuracy and material properties of the MakerBot 3D desktop printer. Rapid Prototyp J. 2015;21(5):618–27.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Meghan C, Darrell EH. 3D printing in the laboratory: maximize time and funds with customized and open-source labware. J Lab Autom. 2016;21(4):489–95.CrossRef Meghan C, Darrell EH. 3D printing in the laboratory: maximize time and funds with customized and open-source labware. J Lab Autom. 2016;21(4):489–95.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Czyżewski W, Jachimczyk J, Hoffman Z, Szymoniuk M, Litak J, Maciejewski M et al. Low-cost cranioplasty—a systematic review of 3D printing in medicine. Mater (Basel). 2022;15(14):4731. Czyżewski W, Jachimczyk J, Hoffman Z, Szymoniuk M, Litak J, Maciejewski M et al. Low-cost cranioplasty—a systematic review of 3D printing in medicine. Mater (Basel). 2022;15(14):4731.
13.
go back to reference Khonsari RH, Adam J, Benassarou M, Bertin H, Billotet B, Bouaoud J, et al. In-house 3D printing: why, when, and how? Overview of the national french good practice guidelines for in-house 3D-printing in maxillo-facial surgery, stomatology, and oral surgery. J Stomatol oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;122(4):458–61.CrossRefPubMed Khonsari RH, Adam J, Benassarou M, Bertin H, Billotet B, Bouaoud J, et al. In-house 3D printing: why, when, and how? Overview of the national french good practice guidelines for in-house 3D-printing in maxillo-facial surgery, stomatology, and oral surgery. J Stomatol oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;122(4):458–61.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Narita M, Takaki T, Shibahara T, Iwamoto M, Yakushiji T, Kamio T. Utilization of desktop 3D printer-fabricated “Cost-Effective” 3D models in orthognathic surgery. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020;42(1):24. Narita M, Takaki T, Shibahara T, Iwamoto M, Yakushiji T, Kamio T. Utilization of desktop 3D printer-fabricated “Cost-Effective” 3D models in orthognathic surgery. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020;42(1):24.
15.
go back to reference Ravi P, Chepelev LL, Stichweh GV, Jones BS, Rybicki FJ. Medical 3D printing dimensional accuracy for multi-pathological anatomical models 3d printed using material extrusion. J Digit Imaging. 2022;35(3):613–22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ravi P, Chepelev LL, Stichweh GV, Jones BS, Rybicki FJ. Medical 3D printing dimensional accuracy for multi-pathological anatomical models 3d printed using material extrusion. J Digit Imaging. 2022;35(3):613–22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Msallem B, Sharma N, Cao S, Halbeisen FS, Zeilhofer H-F, Thieringer FM. Evaluation of the dimensional accuracy of 3D-printed anatomical mandibular models using FFF, SLA, SLS, MJ, and BJ printing technology. J Clin Med. 2020;9(3):817.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Msallem B, Sharma N, Cao S, Halbeisen FS, Zeilhofer H-F, Thieringer FM. Evaluation of the dimensional accuracy of 3D-printed anatomical mandibular models using FFF, SLA, SLS, MJ, and BJ printing technology. J Clin Med. 2020;9(3):817.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Aristotle S, Patil S, Jayakumar S. Dimensional accuracy of medical models of the skull produced by three-dimensional printing technology by advanced morphometric analysis. J Anat Soc India. 2022;71(3):186–90.CrossRef Aristotle S, Patil S, Jayakumar S. Dimensional accuracy of medical models of the skull produced by three-dimensional printing technology by advanced morphometric analysis. J Anat Soc India. 2022;71(3):186–90.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Pakvasa M, Prescher H, Hendren-Santiago B, Da Lomba T, McKenzie N, Orsbon C, et al. An easy-to-use protocol for segmenting and 3-d printing craniofacial ct-images using open-source software. Face. 2022;3(1):66–73.CrossRef Pakvasa M, Prescher H, Hendren-Santiago B, Da Lomba T, McKenzie N, Orsbon C, et al. An easy-to-use protocol for segmenting and 3-d printing craniofacial ct-images using open-source software. Face. 2022;3(1):66–73.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Prendergast ME, Burdick JA. Recent advances in enabling technologies in 3D printing for precision medicine. Adv Mater. 2020;32(13):1–14.CrossRef Prendergast ME, Burdick JA. Recent advances in enabling technologies in 3D printing for precision medicine. Adv Mater. 2020;32(13):1–14.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference George E, Liacouras P, Rybicki FJ, Mitsouras D. Measuring and establishing the accuracy and reproducibility of 3D printed medical models. Radiographics. 2017;37(5):1424–50.CrossRefPubMed George E, Liacouras P, Rybicki FJ, Mitsouras D. Measuring and establishing the accuracy and reproducibility of 3D printed medical models. Radiographics. 2017;37(5):1424–50.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Jin Z, Li Y, Yu K, Liu L, Fu J, Yao X, et al. 3D printing of physical organ models: recent developments and challenges. Adv Sci (Weinh). 2021;8(17):e2101394.CrossRefPubMed Jin Z, Li Y, Yu K, Liu L, Fu J, Yao X, et al. 3D printing of physical organ models: recent developments and challenges. Adv Sci (Weinh). 2021;8(17):e2101394.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Diana T, Silviya N, Ivan G. Accuracy of linear measurements on polygonal models of dry mandibles generated from industrial CT data. Acta morphol anthropol. 2017;24:1–2. Diana T, Silviya N, Ivan G. Accuracy of linear measurements on polygonal models of dry mandibles generated from industrial CT data. Acta morphol anthropol. 2017;24:1–2.
24.
go back to reference Asaumi J, Kawai N, Honda Y, Shigehara H, Wakasa T, Kishi K. Comparison of three-dimensional computed tomography with rapid prototype models in the management of coronoid hyperplasia. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol. 2001;30(6):330–5.CrossRef Asaumi J, Kawai N, Honda Y, Shigehara H, Wakasa T, Kishi K. Comparison of three-dimensional computed tomography with rapid prototype models in the management of coronoid hyperplasia. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol. 2001;30(6):330–5.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Kamio T, Hayashi K, Onda T, Takaki T, Shibahara T, Yakushiji T, et al. Utilizing a low-cost desktop 3D printer to develop a “one-stop 3D printing lab” for oral and maxillofacial surgery and dentistry fields. 3D Print Med. 2018;4(1):1–2.CrossRef Kamio T, Hayashi K, Onda T, Takaki T, Shibahara T, Yakushiji T, et al. Utilizing a low-cost desktop 3D printer to develop a “one-stop 3D printing lab” for oral and maxillofacial surgery and dentistry fields. 3D Print Med. 2018;4(1):1–2.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Tian Y, Chen CX, Xu X, Wang J, Hou X, Li K, et al. A review of 3D printing in dentistry: technologies, affecting factors, and applications. Scanning. 2021;2021:9950131.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Tian Y, Chen CX, Xu X, Wang J, Hou X, Li K, et al. A review of 3D printing in dentistry: technologies, affecting factors, and applications. Scanning. 2021;2021:9950131.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
go back to reference Khorsandi D, Fahimipour A, Abasian P, Saber SS, Seyedi M, Ghanavati S, et al. 3D and 4D printing in dentistry and maxillofacial surgery: Printing techniques, materials, and applications. Acta Biomater. 2021;122:26–49.CrossRefPubMed Khorsandi D, Fahimipour A, Abasian P, Saber SS, Seyedi M, Ghanavati S, et al. 3D and 4D printing in dentistry and maxillofacial surgery: Printing techniques, materials, and applications. Acta Biomater. 2021;122:26–49.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Trueness of cone-beam computed tomography-derived skull models fabricated by different technology-based three-dimensional printers
Authors
Xiaotong Wang
Sohaib Shujaat
Eman Shaheen
Eleonora Ferraris
Reinhilde Jacobs
Publication date
01-12-2023
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Oral Health / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6831
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03104-w

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

BMC Oral Health 1/2023 Go to the issue